Current Survey.........

We surveyed 3,037 members of the ALP between December 13, 2015 and
January 6, 2016. As with other surveys, we weight responses to ensure
that our results are representative of the U.S. (citizen) population,
matching to the 2015 Current Population Survey. This survey comprises
the baseline of the PEPS, and these ALP members will continue to be
surveyed throughout the election cycle. Administering the baseline
survey this early will enhance our ability to say with confidence
whether opinions have or have not changed over the course of the
campaign once the candidates start advertising, and the nominations
become clear. These early measures will also help shed light on when an
individual's position influences their choice of candidate, versus when a
candidate's position influences an individual's views or position about
issues.

Because this is only the baseline wave of PEPS data, the major
contribution of the effort — the longitudinal, panel aspect — is yet to
be realized. However, even with the initial baseline wave, the PEPS can
help shed lighton unexplored and underexplored aspects of this
election, a few of which are illustrated below."...Chart above from rand.org.blog

The congressman called endorsing Trump “one of my life-changing
moments” — along with quitting his job at 30 to go to college and law
school, adopting his children, and deciding to run for Congress in 2010....

“Donald Trump is saying what the voters agree on and what the voters
are feeling,” Marino said, adding that voters are angry at the political
system generally....

Marino contrasted Trump's startling success this primary season with
an event several years ago that he said epitomized the disdain
Washington elites have for average voters. During debate on a border
security bill nearly two years ago, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi
allegedly told Marino he was "insignificant."

“Yeah, I think the moderators were fair,”Priebus said when asked by
Breitbart News if he thought Megyn Kelly, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace
were fair in the questions they asked. “The candidates have availed
themselves to the process. Sono one forced candidates to come on stage
and answer questions so when candidates availed themselves to the
process and availed themselves to the press, they opened themselves up
to the process. So you know what? It really doesn’t matterwhether it’s
fair or not.”"...

Sessions, known for his hard-line stance against illegal immigration, is popular in some conservative circles.

Sen. Ted Cruz, another presidential candidate, frequently invoked Sessions in order to defend his record on immigration. On Sunday, Drudge Report founder Matt Drudge called Sessions the "conservative soul" of the US Senate.

Several other notable politicians have also recently thrown their
support to Trump, though another GOP candidate, Marco Rubio, has grabbed
the lion's share of recent endorsements from elected officials.

Last Friday, former presidential candidate and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christieendorsed Trump. And former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, whose own record on illegal immigration once caused a national firestorm, announced her support for Trump on Saturday.The Trump campaign emailed reporters the following statement hailing Sessions' endorsement:

Today Donald J. Trump received the
endorsement of Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions. Senator Sessions is widely
recognized as the nation's most highly respected official on the issue
of illegal immigration.

Mr. Trump stated, “I am deeply honored to
have the endorsement of Senator Jeff Sessions, leader of congressional
conservatives. He has been called the Senate's indispensable man and the
gold standard. He led the fight against the Gang of Eight, against
Obama's trade deal, against Obama's judges, and for American
sovereignty. He has stood up to special interests as few have. There is
no more respected man in Congress and we are closely aligned on many
issues, including trade and illegal immigration, and I am proud to
consider Jeff Sessions an advisor, friend and ally.”

Senator
Ted Cruz of Texas, who won the Iowa caucuses before Trump went on a
spree of three straight victories, lagged in fourth place, at 9 percent,
while retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson captured just 4 percent. Only 7
percent said they were undecided.

The results show more moderate Republican and unenrolled voters split
between Rubio and Kasich, echoing the party’s inability nationally to
coalesce firmly behind an alternative to Trump. At 60 percent, Kasich
drew the survey’s highest favorability ratings.

With primaries across the country, more delegates are at stake on
Super Tuesday than in any other day of the nominating contest, and
Trump’s dominance in states that voted previously have positioned him to
consolidate an already hefty delegate lead. Trump’s largest victory
margin came in the most recent contest, a 22-point win over Rubio in the
Feb. 23 Nevada caucuses.

While the nominating contest tops the
ticket, GOP primary voters will also vote for state committee candidates
Tuesday. Governor Charlie Baker, seeking to wrest seats away from
conservatives and increase control of the party apparatus, has launched a
slate of more moderate challengers................ Baker draws a favorability
rating of 78 percent in the GOP poll, with just 9 percent disapproving.
Nearly three-quarters of those with an unfavorable view of the governor
say they will vote for Trump.

Baker has occasionally criticized
Trump and has said he does not expect to vote for him. But his chosen
candidate, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, rocked the Republican
Party on Friday by endorsing Trump, after dropping out because of his
disappointing finish in New Hampshire.

Baker’s effort to pull out moderate voters could change the jockeying for second place here, Paleologos said.

“If
Baker’s revolution that he’s waging in all these state committee
districts is successful, he’s going to draw out more [voters] against
the core state committee Republicans, and that could help Kasich. I
don’t know if that’s going to get him to second place,” he said........... Trump
is viewed favorably by 56 percent of those polled, with 35 percent
reporting unfavorable opinions. Cruz is “under water” in public opinion,
with just 37 percent holding favorable opinions of the first
term-senator, and nearly half viewing him negatively........... Trump leads
among both male and female voters, though he does better with men.
Kasich performs better with women, while Rubio is even, according to the
poll.

Politico article on Massachusetts Suffolk poll results: 2/27/16, "Poll: Trump blowout in Massachusetts,"Politico, Nick Gass"Donald Trump's lead in a new Suffolk University poll among likely Republican primary voters in Massachusetts days
voters head to the polls on Super Tuesday is, in a word, huge.

Trump
leads the field with 43 percent, more than 20 points ahead of Florida
Sen. Marco Rubio, who finished in second with 20 percent. Ohio Gov. John
Kasich finished close behind with 17 percent, followed by Texas Sen.
Ted Cruz with 9 percent and Ben Carson with 4 percent. Just 7 percent of
voters remain undecided among those candidates.

Kasich is the best-liked candidate in Massachusetts, however, with a net positive rating
of +39 points (60 percent favorable to 21 percent unfavorable), while
Trump's net favorability is at +22 points (56 percent to 34 percent) and
Rubio's is at +19 points (51 percent to 32 percent). Cruz's
favorability is underwater, at -11 points (37 percent favorable to 48
percent unfavorable).

The racial inequities are not just limited to the
Maya Indians in the state of Chiapas who took up arms on the very day
Nafta took effectmore than a year ago, in what is slowly taking on
shades of a national civil rights movement for Indians. Indigenous
people all over Mexico, and those with Indian features -- and dark skins
-- all feel a degree of the same kind of intolerance. ............

"We got there early by Mexican standards, around
7:45, and the place was empty," Mr. McDonald said. "But we stood there
waiting and waiting until finally the maitre'd came along and told me,
in English, that domestics are not served here." Mrs. Miranda was not
wearing a uniform, Mr. McDonald said. The restaurant simply assumed that
because she was an Indian she was a maid.

The restaurant manager, Mario Padilla, acknowledged
that it is policy at Prego and othertop restaurants to prohibit
servants and drivers, many of whom are Indians."The type of people who
usually come to restaurants of this class all have servants, but they
usually leave them at home," Mr. Padilla said. He said the restriction
was needed to protect patrons against people who "lack discretion" and
try to bring their servants. He denied the policy was discriminatory.
"We're not racists," he said. "We're just trying to protect the image of
the restaurant."

"There is going to be a sharp increase in social
tensions," said Sergio Aguayo, a human rights activist in Mexico City,
"and some of it is going to be racially inspired."

Bias against Indians has long been more economic
than personal. Sixty percent of Indians over 12 are already unemployed
and of those who work most earn less than the minimum wage of about
$2.50 a day.

But most Mexicans say bigotry does not exist here.
Schoolchildren are drilled on the life of Benito Juarez, a Zapotec
Indian who was President of Mexico in the 19th century, and told that
his election proves all Mexicans are equal. Mexico has no affirmative
action laws. The National Commission of Human Rights has never received a
discrimination complaint and does not even have a process to handle
one.

Complicating questions of race is the mixed lineage
of most Mexicans. From the Spanish founding of Mexico,social class has
been determined by racial purity, with those born in Spain at the top,
and full-blooded Indians on the bottom. But over centuries of
intermarriage, nearly all Mexicans are considered part Indian.

"Yes, Mexicans honor their Indian roots with
statues," said Miguel Acosta, an investigator at the Mexican Academy of
Human Rights at the Autonomous National University of Mexico, "but
historic roots are not at all useful when it comes to eating or just
living today."

Mexico City has the highest concentration of Indians
in the country, yet most times they are nearly invisible, showing up
only in knots of beggars at busy intersections and among the feathered
dancers who perform for tourists. No Indians serve in the Cabinet of
President Ernesto Zedillo and only a handful are in the Congress,
although 1 in 10 Mexicans is considered Indian.

The racial insensitivity extends to blacks, although
few live in Mexico. A recent commercial on national television featured
a dark-skinned man in a white tuxedo telling viewers that at Comex, a
Mexican paint company, "they're working like niggers to offer you a
white sale."

There were no complaints about the ad "because we
don't have a racism problem -- that's the key to it all," said Marisela
Vergada, an account executive at Alazraki Agency, the large Mexican
advertising firm that produced the 20-second spot. "It is simply an
expression that everyone uses."

Such "expressions" pop up in a commercial for
packaged toast that features a black baker boasting that his skin color
gives him the expertise to recognize the right shade of toast. Aunt
Jemima pancake mix goes by the brand name "La Negrita" here.

'Racial Hierarchy'

The few blacks who live in Mexico are either
immigrantsor the descendants of about 200,000 African slavesbrought
here before slavery was abolished in 1829. While researching a book
about African slaves in Mexico, Colin A. Palmer, a history professor at
the graduate center of the City University of New York, said he quickly
noticed that beneath an initial friendliness "a racial hierarchy existed
in Mexico."

"It is based on skin color, with white the higher
value as opposed to those who are brown and those, God forbid, who are
black," Professor Palmer said.

Visiting Americans sometimes get a taste of the same
bigotry.Michael Waller, president of Cleveland Telecomunications
Corp., of Solon, Ohio, accompanied United States Commerce Secretary Ron
Brown on a Nafta-related business trip to Mexico a year ago. He said
Mexicans were eager to talk to an American businessman on the telephone.
But that changed when he arrived.

"It was obvious from the moment I came into the
airport and people reacted as if I had been beamed down from the
Enterprise," Mr. Waller, who is black, said. "I guess what they expected
was what they saw on TV, the Crips and the Bloods, you know, that kind
of thing."

He said that when he did not receive a single follow-up
letter, he decided to focus on multiracial Brazil, where he now has
several deals pending."

Border
Patrol reported shots fired on Friday morning. At around 8:30 a.m.,
neighbors in Refugio, a small community by Rio Grande City, said a
dead-end street was full of Border Patrol agents and Department of
Public Safety officials.

"As
soon as you step out in this field, you will have a Border Patrol
watching us,” he said. “The more military, the more police, the more
security they put here, well, they are going to get across. It’s a cat
and mouse game. It is the way it is for them.”

Garza said he is glad law enforcement officials patrol the area. However, he said he feels he’s on edge, lately.

"On
Friday, at approximately 8:30 a.m. CST, Border Patrol Agents assigned
to the Rio Grande City Station, reported being fired upon from the
Mexican side of the Rio Grande near El Refugio, Texas. An agent returned
fire using his service-issued weapon and retreated to a safer location.
No injuries to a CBP employee were reported. No other agent fired their
weapon. The Government of Mexico was notified of the incident. The
Government of Mexico has not reported any injuries to anyone on the
Mexican side of the river. No apprehensions were made. No contraband was
found. The incident is currently under investigation by the Starr
County Sheriff's Office."

The picture hasn’t been rosy in terms of the general population
either: since last May, Fox News Channel’s perception levels with adults
18+ have uncharacteristically been drawingsignificantly more negative
feedback than positive. At this point, both FNC and CNN are scoring at
similar perception levels and they are both negative.

To measure perception of the two networks, YouGov BrandIndex used its
Buzz score, which asks respondents: "If you've heard anything about the
brand in the last two weeks, through advertising, news or word of
mouth, was it positive or negative?" A score can range from 100 to -100
with a zero score equaling a neutral position.

On January 1, 2013, Fox News Channel’s Buzz score with Republican
adults 18 and over was 49. By the first GOP debate last August, the
score had dropped to 38. The downward momentum accelerated earlier this
year when Fox News Channel’s score droppedfrom 36 on January 18th to 14
on February 12th (2016). Trump declined to participate in FNC’s sanctioned GOP
debate on January 28th. Fox News Channel’s current Buzz score is 17."...

"Why political professionals are struggling to make sense of the world they created.""We’re in a funny moment. Those who do politics for a living, some
of them quite brilliant, are struggling to comprehend the central fact
Republican primary race, while regular people have already absorbed what
has happened and is happening. Journalists and politicos have been
sharing schemes for how Marco parlays a victoryout of winning nowhere,
or Ted roars back, or Kasich has to finish second in Ohio. But in my
experience any nonpolitical person on the street, when asked who will
win, not only knows but gets a look as if you’re teasing him. Trump,
they say.

I had such a conversation again Tuesday with a friend
who repairs shoes in a shop on Lexington Avenue. Jimmy asked me,
conversationally, what was going to happen. I deflected and asked who he
thinks is going to win. “Troomp!” He’s a very nice man, an elderly, old-school Italian-American, but I saw impatience flick across his face: Aren’t you supposed to know these things? In America now only normal people are capable of seeing the obvious.

But actually that’s been true for a while, and is how we got in the position we’re in.

Last October
I wrote of the five stages of Trump, based on the Kübler-Ross stages of
grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. Most of
the professionals I know are stuck somewhere between four and five.

But
I keep thinking of how Donald Trump got to be the very likely
Republican nominee. There are many answers and reasons, but my thoughts
keep revolving around the idea of protection. It is a theme that has
been something of a preoccupation in this space over the years, but I
think I am seeing it now grow into an overall political dynamic
throughout the West.

There are the protected and the unprotected.
The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The
unprotected are starting to push back, powerfully.

The protected
are the accomplished, the secure, the successful—those who have power or
access to it. They are protected from much of the roughness of the
world. More to the point, they are protected from the world they have created. Again, they make public policy and have for some time.

I want to call them the elite to load the rhetorical dice, but let’s stick with the protected.

They
are figures in government, politics and media. They live in nice
neighborhoods, safe ones. Their families function, their kids go to good
schools, they’ve got some money. All of these things tend to isolate
them, or provide buffers. Some of them—in Washington it is important
officials in the executive branch or on the Hill; in Brussels,
significant figures in the European Union—literally have their own
security details.

Because they are protected they feel they can
do pretty much anything, impose any reality. They’re insulated from many
of the effects of their own decisions. One issue obviously
roiling the U.S. and western Europe is immigration. It is THE issue of
the moment, a real and concrete one but also a symbolic one: It stands
for all the distance between governments and their citizens.

It is of course the issue that made Donald Trump. Britain
will probably leave the European Union over it. In truth immigration is
one front in that battle, but it is the most salient because of the
European refugee crisis and the failure of the protected class to
address it realistically and in a way that offers safety to the
unprotected.

If you are an unprotected American—one with limited
resources and negligible access to power—you have absorbed some lessons
from the past 20 years’ experience of illegal immigration. You know the
Democrats won’t protect you and the Republicans won’t help you. Both
parties refused to control the border. The Republicans were afraid of
being called illiberal, racist, of losing a demographic for a
generation. The Democrats wanted to keep the issue alive to use it as a
wedge against the Republicans and to establish themselves as owners of
the Hispanic vote.

The unprotected came to think they
owed the establishment—another word for the protected—nothing, no
particular loyalty, no old allegiance. Mr. Trump came from that.

Similarly
in Europe, citizens on the ground in member nations came to see the EU
apparatus as a racket—an elite that operated in splendid isolation,
looking after its own while looking down on the people.

In Germany the incident that tipped public opinion against the Chancellor Angela Merkel’s
liberal refugee policy happened on New Year’s Eve in the public square
of Cologne. Packs of men said to be recent migrants groped and molested
groups of young women. It was called a clash of cultures, and it was
that, but it was also wholly predictable if any policy maker had cared
to think about it. And it was not the protected who were the victims—not
a daughter of EU officials or members of the Bundestag. It was middle-
and working-class girls—the unprotected, who didn’t even immediately
protest what had happened to them. They must have understood that in the
general scheme of things they’re nobodies.

What marks this
political moment, in Europe and the U.S., is the rise of the
unprotected. It is the rise of people who don’t have all that much
against those who’ve been given many blessings and seem to believe they
have them not because they’re fortunate but because they’re better.

You
see the dynamic in many spheres. In Hollywood, as we still call it,
where they make our rough culture, they are careful to protect their own
children from its ill effects. In places with failing schools, they
choose not to help them through the school liberation movement—charter
schools, choice, etc.—because they fear to go up against the most
reactionary professional group in America, the teachers unions. They let
the public schools flounder. But their children go to the best private
schools.

In
wise governments the top is attentive to the realities of the lives of
normal people, and careful about their anxieties. That’s more or less
how America used to be. There didn’t seem to be so much distance between
the top and the bottom.

"I think he has to show us his credentials," said
Bill Bunting,chairman of Pasco County's McCollum team. "He's going to
need the party to win this election; I think he knows that. He only took
this by a small margin, despite all the money he spent."...

"A Politico analysis of Trump's history as a donor sheds light on the
way the New York developer could shape coming elections-much more so
than by lashing out on cable news or appearing at events like the Faith
and Freedom Coalition Conference in D.C. on Friday.

Despite his sharp rhetoric during his brief time on the campaign
trail, Trump’s donations signal he has no particular partisan bias....

At the state level, he gave more than $680,000 to Democratic candidates and committees and less than $420,000 to Republicans.

These totals include gifts by Trump’s companies, which gave large
sums of unlimited soft money in the 1990s. On a single day in July 1996,
four Trump companies gave a total of $250,000 to the Republican National Committee. At the same time, he donated to more individual federal Democratic candidates (47) than to Republican candidates (38).
The POLITICO analysis found Trump heavily involved in politics in
his native New York but also making contributions in state-level
campaigns in California, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New
Jersey, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Colorado, Missouri, Ohio, North
Carolina and South Carolina.

There is a different model for business magnates who give generously
in politics — that of Charles and David Koch, wide-ranging funders of
economically conservative causes, or George Soros on the left.Trump, it
is made clear from his donations, isn’t that kind of political
businessman....

Trump defended his giving by
noting that the Democratic Party is in power in his home state. In New
York, he told Fox News, “Everyone’s Democratic. So what am I going to
do, contribute to Republicans?…I’m not stupid.”...

While Trump ranks among the Empire State’s biggest political donors,
Mahoney said, the pattern of his giving reveals no consistent
philosophy but, rather, a businessman hoping to stay in government’s
good graces."...